cheap vs nicer bike
#51
Member
All this advice———Just buy the good stuff if you can afford it and don't look back. Some people go through life being cheap and some just being good to them selves. Enjoy life don't suffer through it.
Likes For siclmn:
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Merry Old England
Posts: 772
Bikes: Muddyfox Evolve 200, Bicycles4u Paris Explorer, Raleigh Twenty Stowaway, Bickerton California, Saracen Xile, Kona Hoss Deluxe, Vertigo Carnaby, Exodus Havoc, Kona Lanai, Revolution Cuillin Sport, Dawes Kingpin, Bickerton, NSU & Elswick Cosmopolitan
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 297 Post(s)
Liked 33 Times
in
25 Posts
I don't think it's quite as simple as that, road bikes for example are pretty awful at the bottom end based on low end components like freewheels etc but then they get pretty decent with something like Claris and then as you pay more the focus by the manufacturers is to decrease weight increase the number of gears and make the bikes more aerodynamic however this can lead to the bikes being much weaker, less safe and requiring more maintenance. I honestly think a mid-price bike can be the best bike for many cyclists it's really down to the type of cyclist and how they ride the bike. You don't use a Ferrari as an everyday car, they are unreliable and require frequent time consuming maintenance. Comparing a 8 speed cassette with a high end 12 speed cassette the 8 speed may be made of simple steel, very hard wearing and very easy to index even if caked in mud they can work well where as the 12 speed may use much shorter life aluminium and indexing 12 gears on one cassette requires much greater precision of the shifter and cable. I've seen touring sites warn against using high end groupsets as they are more problematic and parts may not be available where you travel they also don't do well for riding thousands of miles and wear out quickly. It's not always about how much a bike costs it's more about how good a fit it is for your application. A high end bike can often be the worst possible choice. As ever the sensible most practical option is often in the middle of the price range with less compromises for the sake of performance.
Likes For Bonzo Banana:
#53
Zip tie Karen
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fair Oaks Ranch, TX
Posts: 7,004
Bikes: '13 Motobecane Fantom29 HT, '16 Motobecane Turino Pro Disc, '18 Velobuild VB-R-022, '21 Tsunami SNM-100
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1465 Post(s)
Liked 1,542 Times
in
806 Posts
In my 45+ years of bicycling experience, there are few really fine riding bikes around. Most bicycles are dead and uninspiring to ride. Cheap bicycles are far more likely to be of the dead variety. However, with a keen eye and judicious choice of hubs and tires, you can build a really excellent bike for not much money. Again, some of my best riding vintage bikes have cost me way less than $1000 to build, all-in. At the $450 price point mentioned by an earlier poster, you have ruled out a new bike purchased at retail. This will be crap to ride. But you might be able to cobble together a decent enough bike. This 1991 Schwinn LeTour is an example of a decent enough riding bike. Weight = 26 lbs, total material cost = $432.
This 1977 Centurion Semi Pro cost me less than $375 all in. It's far superior riding to the LeTour above. The Centurion weighed about 24.5#, IIRC. You have to be willing to look hard for the gems among the piles of crap.
This 1977 Centurion Semi Pro cost me less than $375 all in. It's far superior riding to the LeTour above. The Centurion weighed about 24.5#, IIRC. You have to be willing to look hard for the gems among the piles of crap.
Last edited by Phil_gretz; 12-07-20 at 08:23 AM.